suggests/requires in rpm

[Jeff Spaleta]

On Mon, 24 Jan 2005 23:08:05 +0800, Jeff Pitman <symbiont at berlios.de> wrote:
> The less magic RPM does, the better. Depsolvers are more fluid than RPM,

The less MAGIC we have the better, regardless of where it is.   I
honestly don't see how throwing the issues in the bugreports you
listed up a level to the depresolvers is going to help. Frankly, I
think the more and more you ask depresolvers to do in terms of MAGIC,
the more difficult things will become, because invaraibly different
depresolvers will make different choices leading to different behavior
instead of a standardization of behavior. What you suggest is going to
make things much much worse... leading to a situation where packagers
are designing packages with exactly one high-level depsolver in mind..
instead of focusing on what rpm is going to do with the package. 
Madness.

> which is why they should acquire the necessary complex logic.
> Heretofore mentioned bugzillas already clearly show why magic is a
> BadThing at the RPM level and that the depsolvers should be charged to
> make these decisions:

Right.. so we can all yell at the multiple depsolvers when they all
make uniquely different bad decisions.  Magic is a bad thing... but if
magic is going to have to happen.. you only complicate matters by
asking the multiple depresolvers to each figure out how to implement
it for themselves.


-jef